A lot of sketchy conclusions in this article. Not the least of which is: "Wages are not determined by years of schooling but by the supply and demand for skil

A lot of sketchy conclusions in this article. Not the least of which is: "Wages are not determined by years of schooling but by the supply and demand for skills." First off, this is simply not true in the case of executive pay, which is rigged. If we're making comparisons, let's bring everybody in. Secondly, you cannot compare a national priority with simple market supply and demand. We should be paying teachers at a premium to the market to attract those who would otherwise not go there, and also, make life not so miserable for teachers (even if we don't attract new hires) because teacher quality should not be subject to the vagaries of the market. That's why we (try) to do it in the public sector in the first place.